[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Positioning GCC_ATTR_DEPRECATED
|
From: |
LachlanA |
|
Subject: |
Re: Positioning GCC_ATTR_DEPRECATED |
|
Date: |
Tue, 29 Dec 2015 17:43:57 -0800 (PST) |
John W. Eaton wrote
> Yeah, it does get kind of messy if we are writing things like
>
> extern OCTAVE_ATTR_NORETURN OCTAVE_API void
> foobar (args, ...);
>
> or
>
> extern OCTAVE_API void
> foobar (args, ...) OCTAVE_ATTR_NORETURN;
>
> I don't really see that one is better than the other.
How about
extern OCTAVE_ATTR_NORETURN OCTAVE_API
void
foobar (args, ...);
It is an extra line, but it stops the return type getting lost in the
morass.
$0.02,
Lachlan
--
View this message in context:
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Positioning-GCC-ATTR-DEPRECATED-tp4674197p4674241.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.